Proposal to address new active suspension technologies that can raise the height of the vehicle in motion up to a defined speed. Since the vehicle height has an influence on the headform test area (WAD) and on the test results for legform tests, all possible vehicle heights up to a driving speed of 11.1 m/s (40 km/h) should be considered to be relevant for the impact with a pedestrian. The proposal is a clarification on this issue.To ensure that such an active suspension system is considered for type approval, there should be a detailed description in the information document. Due to the fact that extensions for an existing vehicle type concerning UN Regulation No. 127 are still possible according to 00 and 01 series of amendments, the proposal is relevant for all series of amendments of the UN R127.
33. Referring to agenda item 3(b) (see paragraph 8 above), the expert from Germany suggested postponing discussion on GRSP-65-21 to allow careful consideration of the new provisions of the General Safety Regulation of the European Union, which had proposed an extension of the head impact zone. GRSP agreed to defer discussion of GRSP-65-21 to its December 2019 session and to distribute it with an official symbol.
27. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-64-20, to clarify different interpretations on vehicle configuration testing in the presence of active suspensions, which arose in off-road driving (SUVs mostly) or driving in a car park (sports cars). He concluded that since the vehicle height had an influence on the headform test area and on the test results for legform tests, all possible vehicle heights up to a driving speed of 11.1 m/s (40 km/h) should be considered relevant for impact with a pedestrian. The expert of OICA agreed that the issue raised by Germany was valid and that there was a need to avoid different interpretations, but this needs to be studied carefully, also in relation to the normal procedure of “worst case definition”. He added that this would entail new requirements, therefore needing a series of amendments and transitional provisions. He also added that this issue should be considered in the ongoing WP.29 discussions on the performance of vehicles outside the test boundaries defined in the various UN Regulations. The expert from the Netherlands suggested developing simulation models to check worst case testing. The expert from OICA stressed that testing a vehicle in all potential configurations would be unrealistic and therefore welcomed the statements from the Netherlands. He referred to the work on the certification of automated vehicles whereby an additional 3-pillar approach was considered to address automation:
28. The Chair of GRSP suggested establishing a group of interested experts to further develop the proposal. GRSP agreed with the proposal of its Chair. The expert from Germany announced a possible meeting before 15 February 2019, to submit a new official proposal. Finally, GRSP requested the secretariat to keep GRSP-64-20 as a reference in the agenda of the May 2019 session.
| GRSP-65-21 |